HOMOSEXUAL CLERICALISM COULD BE DISMANTLED BY THE LEGALIZATION OF CIVIL GAY "MARRIAGE"

Press here to read after you have read my post below for a great First Things article on homosexual clericalism that has led us to the brink today:

Homosexual clericalism in the Church, which is the root cause of the scandal and corruption in the Church to include not only bishops and priests, but also rank and file laity who bend over backwards to promote the secular agenda concerning homosexuality and want the Church to bend over backwards to this agenda, could be crushed by gay marriage.

But Father, whatever do you mean? This is what I mean:

Heterosexual priests after Vatican II fell in love with women and married outside the Church. The fact that they entered an invalid, but very public civil marriage led to the priests being suspended from the priesthood. In this regard there was no heterosexual clericalism protecting these poor heterosexual priests and their active sexuality with women.

Not so with homosexuals until now. If they enter a civil "marriage" with a gay partner, they will be treated like their heterosexual counterparts. They would be suspended. So a gay priest could marry a gay partner who he might have courted as a teenager and legally marry him when civil law allows.

South Carolina until relatively recently, allowed girls at the age of 13 marry older men with parental permission. I think I read somewhere where New Hamphsire still allows this. So a gay priest could marry a teenage boy in some states at 16 and 17 years old or younger with parental permission.

The First Things article I link above and I hope you read, makes quite an explicit link to this homosexual clericalism that is at the root of the filth in the Church today and yes it involves the laity too, not just bishops and priests! Here is the best sound byte on this from that article:

McCarrick’s rise to power is evidence of moral resignation. As Darel Paul shows (“Culture War as Class War,” August/September 2018), homosexuality has become a privileged sexual preference, demanding the most aggressive efforts to protect it from any hint of discrimination. The church establishment is anxious not to get on the wrong side of that elite cultural consensus. Don’t get me wrong. I’m confident the old, lax approach to clerical sex with minors is a thing of the past. The official letters and memos reproduced in the Pennsylvania Grand Jury report offer a window on the way outside pressure broke down episcopal efforts to keep the corruption of clerical predation on young boys in the shadows. The public shame of the Boston revelations and the financial pressure of lawsuits forced change. Yet among church leaders there’s no stomach for a battle over gay sex between consenting adults, not even when one of them is a clergyman. Narrowing McCarrick’s transgressions to sex with minors and abuse of power accords with our culture’s morality of consent. This approach indicates that the ecclesiastical establishment wants to operate on safe, secular terrain, not the Church’s tradition, which has become painfully controversial.